What if trees could vote?

A local writer makes the case for a Sarnia tree bylaw, arguing that protecting older native trees like oaks and maples deserves a second look nearly a decade after council rejected similar restrictions.

For a moment let’s imagine the trees on your property, or the trees in a city park had the ability to cast a vote in the next election. I know, I know…a silly thought, but bear with me a moment.

I’m thinking that tree would wish for some of the same things you and I would ask for.

It would wish to feel safe and feel protected. It would want people in place that would work to create an environment for it to prosper. Seems like reasonable requests as a voter!

And yet currently in our City there are no measures to protect our trees. Nothing to prevent a homeowner from removing a healthy tree that may be 100 years or older in age. One phone call and a living part of our City will fall under the chainsaw.
No questions…. it’s their right !
Really? What about the rights of that tree ? Crazy concept huh ?

Trees are living beings!
They have the ability to communicate with each other. Not like us of course, but through underground mycorrhizal networks. In forests, “mother” trees will send nutrients to their young on the forest floor to help get them through the fragile years. Hmmm…!!
They don’t ask for more than a drink of water, and give us so much in return. At times not appreciated until they're gone, and then too late.
Currently, plans are being implemented by the City of Sarnia to increase urban tree canopy cover in the upcoming years. I applaud this endeavour, but I question how planting 1200 new trees each year is going to offset the hundreds of large trees that are removed annually.

Before some reach for a keyboard to write a rebuttal to what you think is coming next let me make a suggestion.
A bylaw placing restrictions on homeowners from removing trees on their property failed to get approval from City Council in 2017. It was met with strong opposition from citizens of the City, and probably would again if put forth in the same language.
What about a compromise?

What if we implemented a tree bylaw that puts “guidelines” on ONLY the removal of native trees such as Oak (the most ecologically impactful tree in the forest), or native Maples, Tulip trees, etc.?

The importance of native trees/shrubs that are indigenous to this area is very significant for the well-being of many species; for pollinators, nesting birds, habitat, resilience to drought, etc.

Is now the time to relook at a decision made almost 10 years ago and rewrite a path before all our heritage trees are gone ?

This may be a mind blowing concept to some in our City, but we would join a growing collection of cities like London, Kingston, Toronto, Oakville and others, that recognized the need to preserve and value the contribution of our “other” living members.

Trees don’t vote, but neither do our young children ! It’s up to us to protect them.